Jefferson crowned Holy Roman Emperor in 1806

AFAIK THAT was only brought in later, but I could be wrong.

That said, IIRC to BE Holy Roman Emperor one actually needed to possess land INSIDE the empire (however small- François Étienne of Lorraine originally only had the county of Falkenburg and the duchy of Teschen; the first Luxemburg emperor only had the county of Luxemburg (his other possessions were regarded as being outside the empire)). No idea how people like Henry VIII or Richard of Cornwall got considered (Alfonso X could make the shaky claim of having a blood link to the Hohenstaufens), though.
So perhaps the Pope might gift Jefferson an acre of land outside Frankfort, via political machinations of some sort. :p
 
Nope.

Catholic electoral votes:
The Archbishop of Mainz
The Archbishop of Trier
The Archbishop of Cologne
The King of Bohemia (Habsburg)
The Elector of Bavaria
Protestant electoral votes:
The Elector of Saxony (Catholic)
The Elector of Brandenburg, who was also King of Prussia
The Elector of Hanover, who was also King of Great Britain

Technically the title can go to a Protestant; But, it normally went among the current holding family - the Haspburgs. As for Jefferson being Holy Roman Emperor is it ASB, if anything the Pope could invest the title with the Elector of Hanover, which would be King George of England.
The Ecclesiastical states were abolished in 1803 as part of German mediatization process.
 
The Ecclesiastical states were abolished in 1803 as part of German mediatization process.
And in such an odd fashion, with many Prince-Bishops declaring dynasties and getting married. Part of why I have that long word underneath my username. Church lands mostly went to major families, who always had a member of their dynasty in charge. Anyways, one of the main issue was that France annexed several of those Prince-Bishoprics, with all the other big states grabbing other stuff like crazy and constantly switching it around. I think there ended up with only one Prince-Bishopric in the Confederatiin of the Rhine, and that was in a small area and because the leader was a good administrator and helped out Nappy. Anyone able to tell me how to post images images here? Can never figure it out on my iPad.

http://ghdi.ghi-dc.org/map.cfm?map_id=3757


Ahhh, and another big thing. As the title of this thread is about Jefferson being crowned, we need the actual crown.
 
In 1806 Kaiser Francis dissolved the Holy Roman Empire and declared himself the Emperor of Austria.

The Pope at this time was fed up with Napoleon and wanted a way out of this mess. With the point of divergence being the US declaring war on France in 1798, paint a scenario where the Pope refuses to recognize Francis's decision and instead crowns the President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, as the Emperor of the Romans in 1806. Bonus points if the US Constitution is amended to allow for this, as otherwise it would be illegal under the Titles of Nobility Clause.

By 1806 the popes were not involved in this procedure for a very long time: Charles V was the last one crowned by the Pope in 1530. The person conspicuous by his absence from the list of those who may have a say in the issue is certain Napoléon Bonaparte, also known as Napoleon I, Emperor of the French. Something tells me that he may not be appreciative of an idea. The issues like Jefferson not (AFAIK) being a Catholic, choice of an emperor not being a papal business or even a needed amendment to the US Constitution are trifles comparing to this fundamental obstacle.
 
By 1806 the popes were not involved in this procedure for a very long time: Charles V was the last one crowned by the Pope in 1530. The person conspicuous by his absence from the list of those who may have a say in the issue is certain Napoléon Bonaparte, also known as Napoleon I, Emperor of the French. Something tells me that he may not be appreciative of an idea. The issues like Jefferson not (AFAIK) being a Catholic, choice of an emperor not being a papal business or even a needed amendment to the US Constitution are trifles comparing to this fundamental obstacle.
I know, that was because of the Protestant Reformation. Though I guess the Pope would be desperate enough by 1806.

Okay everyone. Now that we've accepted the possibility of this happening is low but exists, time for part two. How long would it take before Jefferson declared the Republic of Rome? There is no way he would actually govern as an Emperor.
 
What I see loking up King of the Romans is this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_of_the_Romans
Candidates for the kingship were at first the heads of the Germanic stem duchies. As these units broke up, rulers of smaller principalities and even non-Germanic rulers were considered for the position. The only requirements generally observed were that the candidate be an adult male, a Catholic Christian, and not in holy orders. The kings were elected by several Imperial Estates (secular princes as well as Prince-Bishops), often in the imperial city of Frankfurt after 1147, a custom recorded in the Schwabenspiegel code in about 1275.

The implication is that, for Richard of Cornwall etc, you just have to be there, putting yourself forward, with a good body of support and no landed requirement

They may have brought that in later?
 
I know, that was because of the Protestant Reformation.

Reformation had less to do with it than a declined importance of the Papal power: nobody cared about the papal "input" into the issue; the elected emperors had been crowned as the kings of Germany after which they were simply proclaimed themselves Imperator Electus Romanorum.

Though I guess the Pope would be desperate enough by 1806.

Besides being desperate, he also was at Napoleon's mercy: the papal territories had been surrounded by the French vassal states and in 2 years they'll be occupied by the French and annexed to France. In 1804 the Pope arrived to Nappy's coronation but was not even allowed to put a crown on his head, just was there as a "honorable hostage".

Okay everyone. Now that we've accepted the possibility of this happening is low but exists,

Possibility exists only if by whatever reason Napoleon decided that this is a good idea. But why would Nappy make such a decision is beyond me: it would undermine his power in Germany. Before going anywhere further, you need to find a plausible explanation.


time for part two. How long would it take before Jefferson declared the Republic of Rome? There is no way he would actually govern as an Emperor.

What would his title have to do with the territory that he could declare "the Republic of Rome"? The title "Emperor of the Romans" was just a different form of "Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire", which, geographically, had nothing to do with Rome. Anyway, none of the above really matters because in 2 years "the Rome" is incorporated into the French Empire.
 
AFAIK THAT was only brought in later, but I could be wrong.

That said, IIRC to BE Holy Roman Emperor one actually needed to possess land INSIDE the empire (however small- François Étienne of Lorraine originally only had the county of Falkenburg and the duchy of Teschen; the first Luxemburg emperor only had the county of Luxemburg (his other possessions were regarded as being outside the empire)). No idea how people like Henry VIII or Richard of Cornwall got considered (Alfonso X could make the shaky claim of having a blood link to the Hohenstaufens), though.

It was not only about holding land inside the HRE. It was about being noble, that is being acknowledged noble by the electors of the HRE, who themselves answered to lesser nobles.

Jefferson had as much chance to be elected holy roman emperor then a black foreign born being elected president of the US during the Jim Crow laws’ years.
 
Now this has got me thinking of other Presidents as Emperor

"I am the Holy Roman Emperor of the German Nation, cloaked in immense power!"
-Emperor Lincoln
 
Alien Space Bats

LOL Thank you for posting that, I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out what hell ASB meant.

The ATL (I think I am using that one correctly) would play out based on what the Pope was up to; he could be trying to use a distant, disinterested figure head (Jefferson) as a legal ruler and then move to make himself the defacto emperor. He could buy off the Americans with special/exclusive trading rights, while weakening (disrespectful) European rivals. It could have been a nice (still absurd) power play, the Americans would only gain in the ruse and the Pope would be become a pseudo, but serious temporal power once again. Looks to me a win, win, he should have gone for it.
 
LOL Thank you for posting that, I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out what hell ASB meant.

The ATL (I think I am using that one correctly) would play out based on what the Pope was up to; he could be trying to use a distant, disinterested figure head (Jefferson) as a legal ruler and then move to make himself the defacto emperor. He could buy off the Americans with special/exclusive trading rights, while weakening (disrespectful) European rivals. It could have been a nice (still absurd) power play, the Americans would only gain in the ruse and the Pope would be become a pseudo, but serious temporal power once again. Looks to me a win, win, he should have gone for it.
He isn't exactly in charge of some giant market. Germany was was never really in his hands, and even if an Emperor tried giving away some trade rights, the various states would keep charging tolls and taxes on anyone moving throug their land.

Perhaps we have the Pope hand over the title of Emperor to the office of the American President (or to the position of Commander-in-Chief) due to dealing with the Barbary Corsairs? Though the Americans would need to see through their war all the way this time instead of pulling out and paying up.
 
LOL Thank you for posting that, I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out what hell ASB meant.

The ATL (I think I am using that one correctly) would play out based on what the Pope was up to; he could be trying to use a distant, disinterested figure head (Jefferson) as a legal ruler

The main problem would be his legal and physical inability to do anything of the kind: legal because election of the emperor of the HRE was done by the electors and physical because at that time the Pope was still ruling his own state only because Nappy let him (and it would not be for long). An idea that the Pope is declaring creation of his own empire confined to the papal states belongs either to "what Pius VII could do if he became insane before his insanity is being noticed" or to good old ASBs. ;)

and then move to make himself the defacto emperor.

Rather difficult with Napoleon controlling Italy.

He could buy off the Americans with special/exclusive trading rights, while weakening (disrespectful) European rivals.

As a trade partner the papal states at that time hardly were of any serious value to anybody.

It could have been a nice (still absurd) power play, the Americans would only gain in the ruse and the Pope would be become a pseudo, but serious temporal power once again. Looks to me a win, win, he should have gone for it.

By 1806 the Americans were more than vaguely aware of Napoleon's existence, which means that they would not bite even even the schema is offered. ;)
 
He isn't exactly in charge of some giant market. Germany was was never really in his hands, and even if an Emperor tried giving away some trade rights, the various states would keep charging tolls and taxes on anyone moving throug their land.

Perhaps we have the Pope hand over the title of Emperor to the office of the American President (or to the position of Commander-in-Chief) due to dealing with the Barbary Corsairs? Though the Americans would need to see through their war all the way this time instead of pulling out and paying up.

Of course that's true, it is the old cliche, not Roman, not Holy . . . and certainly not an empire - but maybe he (Pope) could have made a few moves pulling in some of the southwestern (still mainly Catholic) German states along with Vienna and northern Italy and then from that power base moved on southeastern France, creating the Ruhr Valley a few centuries early. (We are just making this shit up right?) -- All I need is a warrior-Pope, but we haven't had one of them in a millennia.

"dealing with the Barbary Corsairs" -- Using foreign manpower (from America's new "colonies") to solve an international problem is always a plus. Definitely see it to the end, all the blood would be European and African, no reason not to see it through. Even as fragmented as it was, we could have raised enough taxes to pay for it all as well.
 
The pope has no authority to choose who is the Emperor. The title of HRE was ostensibly an elective office as defined by the Golden Bull of 1356. The pope attempt to choose an emperor would not only piss off Napoleon it would alienate the German states.
 
The main problem would be his legal and physical inability to do anything of the kind: legal because election of the emperor of the HRE was done by the electors and physical because at that time the Pope was still ruling his own state only because Nappy let him (and it would not be for long). An idea that the Pope is declaring creation of his own empire confined to the papal states belongs either to "what Pius VII could do if he became insane before his insanity is being noticed" or to good old ASBs. ;)



Rather difficult with Napoleon controlling Italy.



As a trade partner the papal states at that time hardly were of any serious value to anybody.



By 1806 the Americans were more than vaguely aware of Napoleon's existence, which means that they would not bite even even the schema is offered. ;)

Oh yes I definitely blew it, wasn't thinking about the date (Napoleon), you are absolutely correct, changes everything. Sorry! - - New plan: Pope appoints - Jefferson sells to Napoleon - Jefferson kicks-back to the Pope. -- Win, win, win.
 
Top